Subj : Re: Global Warming
To   : Finnigann
From : richardw
Date : Mon Oct 10 2005 10:13 am

  Re: Re: Global Warming
  By: Finnigann to richardw on Sat Oct 08 2005 02:40 am

 >  ri> Sun's Changes to Blame for Part of Global Warming
 > 
 >  ri> http://www.livescience.com/environment/050930_sun_effect.html
 > 
 >  ri> Errors in how data is interpreted!?!  Imagine that.
 > 
 > Here's the whole article.
 > 
 > Increased output from the Sun might be to blame for 10
 > to 30 percent of global warming that has been measured
 > in the past 20 years, according to a new report.
 > 
 >   Maybe, Maybe not. But they don't disput that it
 >   happening.

I don't necessarily believe it's not happening.

 > Increased emissions of carbon dioxide and other
 > heat-trapping gases still play a role, the scientists
 > say.
 > 
 >   As claim most scientists around the world.
 > 
 > The findings were published online this week by the
 > journal Geophysical Research Letters.
 > 
 > Scientists agree the planet is warming. Effects are
 > evident in melting glaciers and reductions in the
 > amount of frozen ground around the planet.
 > 
 >   And so, your support dwindles away to nothing.
 >   Dejavu?

Huh?  Support for what?

 > The new study is based in part on Columbia University
 > research from 2003 in which scientists found errors in
 > how data on solar brightness is interpreted. A gap in
 > data, owing to satellites not being deployed after the
 > Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, were filled by less
 > accurate data from other satellites, Scafetta says.
 > 
 >    As time goes by even more data will be collected.
 >    Just how much is enough?

Great question.  Let's think about this one.  This planet has been 
floating around here for how many years?  Millions for sure.

We've been collecting this data for, oh, let's be generous and say 100 
years.  How can we begin to presume to know anything about the cycles this 
planet goes through with such a small sample?

 > The Duke analyses examined solar changes over 22 years
 > versus 11 years used in previous studies. The cooling
 > effect of volcanoes and cyclical shifts in ocean
 > currents can have a greater negative impact on the
 > accuracy of shorter data periods.
 > 
 >    Good idea. More data will undoubtedly show even more
 >    support for global warming

It is likely... yes.

 > "The Sun may have minimally contributed about 10 to 30
 > percent of the 1980-2002 global surface warming," the
 > researchers said in a statement today.
 > 
 >    Maybe (again) or maybe not (again)
 > 
 > Many questions remain, however. For example, scientists
 > do not have a good grasp of how much Earth absorbs or
 > reflects sunlight.
 > 
 >    This is about when not if global warming starts.

Huh?  This is about understanding the effects of the variables that 
control the climate... not jumping to conclusions with a tiny amount of 
evidence.

 > "We don't know what the Sun will do in the future,"
 > Scafetta says. "For now, if our analysis is correct, I
 > think it is important to correct the climate models so
 > that they include reliable sensitivity to solar
 > activity. Once that is done, then it will be possible
 > to better understand what has happened during the past
 > hundred years."
 > 
 >    If they succeed in delaying it long enough, they
 >    will have actually proof of global warming after
 >    it's too late to do anything about it

What makes you think we could EVER do anything about it?

I think we have about as much control over the climate as we do over the 
oceanic tides, or the hurricanes, or the volcanoes, or the earthquakes.

I think it's pompousness to think otherwise.

---
 þ Synchronet þ Eleemosynary ELF - eelf.richardw.net

.